Should there be rank?

So what does everybody think about ranks? This discussion was brought up on the original EV forum. Here's the relevant discussion...

John M. Dollan wrote:So, do you guys think ranks would be nice to have back, or not? I know they are, in the end, relatively useless. but I've always thought they were kind of fun. However, if the opinion tends towards the "heck, no!" end of the spectrum, I'll drop the whole idea.

DirkNL wrote:As long as no one is going to spread useless spam just for a higher rank (which is a known phenomenon in some forums), I'd agree. And if the idea is dropped, I'd like to get them published (because I'm pretty curious about them actually.)

John M. Dollan wrote:Get what published? The rank progression?

DirkNL wrote: Yeah, how many posts you would need for what rank (and what ranks are present.)

John M. Dollan wrote:Okay, I see. Yeah, I would probably go with something along the lines of a starting rank, with new ranks achieved at 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, 350, 500, and so on. Make the gaps ever widening, but not to the point where they are grossly unachievable, but neither where they are easy to get with a flurry of post-swarms.

Actually, I might make a few more early divisions, between 1 and 200. both to make it kind of fun, and to (hopefully) inspire newbies to participate more, rather than to just lurk.

As for the rank names, I'd follow along a mass-curve. Newbies would be Interstellar Dust, and slowly move them up to Rock Grain (or something liek that), Asteroid, Planetesimal, Planetoid, Small World, progressing on up through terrestrial planets and gas giants, to brown dwarfs, red dwarfs, and on up to super giant stars. I don't know, but I suppose, ironically, Black Hole would be the ultimate goal, perhaps after 10,000 posts (a number I've seen used as the ultimate rank goal on other forums).

Jorge wrote:Nah. I live perfectly well without ranks. I never saw the point in them, quite frankly.

elioe wrote:I love the idea about ranks. Even if it would increase the amount of spam, it might also increase appropriate conversation - mostly about speculations and planetology, because news and discoveries can't be created just like that. :-)

Hungry4info wrote:I love the idea. But why stop there?after black hole, galactic cluster, globular cluster, dwarf elliptical galaxy, spiral arm, galaxy, galactic cluster, galactic supercluster, galactic filament, and the ultimate goal of "Universe" at 1,000,000 or so posts. (I know, grossly unacheivable, but at least we would always have something to work toward (without spamming of course) for as long as we or this site lives.

For some people, the motivation to get higher ranks would motivate them to post more (as previously mentioned). It might be a good idea to put a reminder not to spam or something in the posting page (that page with the white box where we write our posts, not sure what to call it). Spamming could also be punishable by banning the account, so it would be useless to spam because they would just loose their entire account.

(No... that last paragraph was not intended to refer to the flood of junk in the Speculations center, I'm referring to *after* the rank system is in place.)

Great idea, John, and I'll support it.

Marasama wrote:I don't know. Can there be 2 ranks? Where, if the person is bad or just keep spamming that they get a different rank?

Maybe Blackholes should be a ban rank?I don't know. I am curious to know what was John W.'s original ranking system, though.

John M. Dollan wrote:As far as I am aware, there can only be one ranking system. And John's system is, I'm afraid, lost to Cyber-oblivion. I don't think anything is saved once a ranking system is disabled. At least, I couldn't find anything.

And for blatant spammers, I'll just ban them. Although I wish I could remove them from the members list....

youknowandy wrote:we can all see the # of posts and make our own judgements as to what that "means".

(uh-oh, Marasama is catching up to me. i better stop slacking)

frizaven wrote:Rankings might put off new members if they think their opinions won't be noticed as much as those who've been here for ages. Aside from that I have nothing against the idea.The only forums I've actually seen where rankings mean anything are battle clan forums for internet multiplayer games.

Darkness Nova wrote:Ok this maybe a bit of a necropost but I saw this on another forum I go to. It's not ranks but titles you don't spam for them and you can change them to whatever you wish whenever you wish. You could keep those who want some sort of rank or title happy and not have them spam the place up like they do at.....Other sites......anywho I'm not to sure how that would work but I think it might be a better idea. If you still considering it. Or if you care anymore.

John M. Dollan wrote:I had tried it not long after this thread finished, but unfortunately, like so many other aspects to this forum, I don't have control over it. I can access information and a control panel for ranks, but any change I try to make is simply rejected by the system.

I can only assume that one must have the appropriate software installed on one's computer for this, and other items, to work. Either that, or there are some deep and underlying flaws to this forum that only a major reinstallation could fix.

There's also the stars.No stars, this is for tiny things, like atoms, rocks, pebbles and such.One star, asteroids, comets, moons, basically anything you don't want crashing into Earth.Two stars, planets. You've gotten massive enough to be a planet (by IAU standards). Three Stars, stellar objects. You've gotten massive enough to fuse hydrogen into helium in your core.Four Stars, giants and such. You've moved off the main sequence, and are now fusing helium into carbon and oxygen and all sorts of awkward fusion reactions.Five stars, as a star, having run out of fuel, you've died. So what happens? We ban your sorry rear end!

No of course we don't. Five stars is the black hole, the end of stellar life, but you can keep on posting

ugh, it's so sad that i would have lost my original post count... but the proposed ranks are amusing. maybe i could just add a note "please add 1166 posts to my post count" to my signature if i decided i really cared.

I've been the unchallenged #1 on the old forum and this is only the first post here... so depressing. 'bout the time to fix that...

Almost like the old one, yet very different... feels a bit strange.

PS. The edit box could should have colors fixed, the text (light gray on white) is almost invisible on my computer. Another thing: labels (of buttons etc) etc. disappear when I move mouse pointer over them. But these are minor quirks, I expect this forum to be much more livelier than the old one.

jyril wrote:I've been the unchallenged #1 on the old forum and this is only the first post here... so depressing. 'bout the time to fix that...

Almost like the old one, yet very different... feels a bit strange.

PS. The edit box could should have colors fixed, the text (light gray on white) is almost invisible on my computer. Another thing: labels (of buttons etc) etc. disappear when I move mouse pointer over them. But these are minor quirks, I expect this forum to be much more livelier than the old one.

Welcome to Extrasolar Vision II, Jyril!

Yeah, re-loading from zero is a bit sad, but no worry, you are one of EV1 Forum Masters Nowithstanding previous post count of my own I'm just only a disciple